why?

yes they can with a vpn

because the government can control climate

Bc it was developed in south korea?

I dont know why they want to though

create glow in the dark animals?

yeah

that

bc it is cool :P

It's neat but also it raises interest (and thus funding) for their genetic research

yeah

yeah its cool, it didnt harm the cats

nor the dogs

I really want them to make a glowing parrot

they could

glow in the dark birds would be cool

like the wings lighting up

glow in the dark animals?

10 years later, after Vietnam War 2:

ah yes

can't wait

Can someone explain to me the argument against Climate Change?

I don't understand how the massive quantities of public evidence and documented history can indicate anything else.

they have payed off scientists by the lobbying groups that are totally legit, and when evidence is presented against you just claim the scientist isnt a "climate scientist"

Another idea is that climate change has already happened

they just get fox news host to get on camera and say "everyone knows climate change is a chinese made conspiracy"

Like we most likely had an ice age and also the earth used to be hot volcanic rocks

So its only brainlets that dont believe in climate change

The real question is human induced climate change

Because climate change is already happening, its just how much are humans contributing green house gas to the environment

And does it warrant a global crisis or such

Wait a minute. So the youuuur telling me, that the only argument against climate change, is to discredit the scientists?

They also have a fundemental difficulty in understanding scope and scale. Like, the Earth seems BIG, and a human is SMALL. How can human effect Earth?

Certainly. @3v6en8 that it absolutely true.

The earth changes naturally and I get that.

But my problem is that if we fuck up the Ozone, or actually fuck up something that we can't fix and *accelerate* the end of Humanity. Why would we allow that shit?

Because its hard for humans to understand abstract things

GG @3v6en8, you just advanced to level 7!

Would you rather go extinct thousands of years from now or just a few decades from now. Or potentially within a few lifetimes depending on the evidence and predictions I have not looked.

Also, attacking someone who makes an argument is called ad hominem. You ignore what they say and attack them to discredit them. It is very effective, but it is a logical fallacy. So if the only wide arguments against human contribution to climate change is towards the scientists that do it... I'm sorry but that is just incredibly sad.

Welp, contemporary news like to portray politics like a reality show